Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   9/11 Loose change 2nd edition
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 31 of 60 (318479)
06-06-2006 10:46 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by tsig
06-06-2006 10:30 PM


Re: tools
No it is a mere BS in engineering technology, but it gave me the tools to evaluate this.
just pointing out that there are a lot of people with engineering degrees (some more advances) and people in fire-protection engineering specifically, that consider the official explanation the ONLY explanation.
I will try to achieve your standards of perfection.
just yankin' your chain a little, no offense meant. but we do get the occasion person here that does claim to be someone he's not.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by tsig, posted 06-06-2006 10:30 PM tsig has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by tsig, posted 06-07-2006 9:29 PM arachnophilia has not replied

  
riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 416 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 32 of 60 (318496)
06-06-2006 11:15 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by arachnophilia
06-06-2006 11:24 AM


well, i think distance would be a bigger problem than direction.
I can talk around the world on the same wttage produced by a cell phone. Antenna design and gain are paramount. Direction is everything.
Ever see an old TV antenna with a directional motor drive on it?
Ever see those microwave antennas that look like horns on top of towers? They only go in one direction, and reject signals from all other directions. SAtelite dishes, arecibo, etc. you get the picture.
I am an ameture radio operator, and used to design antennas for fun.
Distance is also a factor, but not as much as direction.
yeah, that much i saw on mythbusters. (though it was a much smaller plane)
I love that show, we watch it all the time. I saw that one.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by arachnophilia, posted 06-06-2006 11:24 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by arachnophilia, posted 06-06-2006 11:46 PM riVeRraT has replied

  
riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 416 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 33 of 60 (318504)
06-06-2006 11:31 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by Codegate
06-06-2006 1:20 PM


This is an area that I have very little knowledge of. I would love to hear from you how the temperature could have exceeded the temperature of burning jet fuel. I've read other accounts that go into how there was actually very little fuel that made it into the buildings and how the black smoke is indicative of an oxygen starved fire which implies a lower burning temperature. Could you please provide some expertise on this point?
I could be wrong about it. But a few thoughts.
There was more than just jet fuel burning, we would have to factor in the tempurature of all things burning at the time.
The glass was broken, and the wind was blowing. Sounds like ingredients for a hot fire to me. The smoke from the building was not going straight up, so there was wind involved. Not only that, I am sure there was a draft induced through the elevator shafts by the heat of the fire, further fueling the combustion process. Could have been like a blast furnace in the center.
Jet fuel will burn, but not all at once. It is similar to kerosene, which burns slowly.
I agree about the black smoke, an indication of an incomplete burn, or just material that make a lot of smoke when it burns. Remember there was carpets, plastics, cubicals, seats from the planes, and all its cargo, etc.
We know the temp was above the melting point of aluminum. That's hot enough to weaken the metal columns by 50%. The columns were also leaning from damage, that weakens there effective strength even further. I think the floors were designed to hold more than ten times their weight, but did not have a chance once weakened that far.
As soon as the falling floor hit the floor beneath it the impact stress caused the immediate failure of the L brackets of that floor. This process continuted at near to freefall speed until they completely fell.
I think I read somewhere that free fall (not that your implying free fall) speed for that material is 185 mph, and the towers fell at 125mph. Perfectly in tune with the amount of resistance encounter by the falling material.
100ft, and 125mph=10 seconds?
185mph would have been 8 seconds.
I have a really hard time believing this. I don't understand how with all of the security cameras, highway cameras, gas station cameras, etc, etc, that are in the DC area that SOMETHING wouldn't have picked up a very large plane inbound.
Me too, but I can understand if showing that video would in someway breach security of the pentagon, or compromise some knowledge.
It would no doubt become a training video for terrorists.
There were so many mis-cues and faulty reports issued that it is very easy for someone to assume they are trying to hide something where in all likelyhood it was probably their own incompetance caused by the stress and bedlam of the day.
That, and at that moment in time, we were at war, and under attack. There must be some limit on the information given for security purposes.
Asking questions is never a bad thing,
I agree.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Codegate, posted 06-06-2006 1:20 PM Codegate has not replied

  
riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 416 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 34 of 60 (318505)
06-06-2006 11:32 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by CK
06-06-2006 3:54 PM


Yes, wouldn't it just be easier to say the terrorist hit us with a missile, if it was a missile?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by CK, posted 06-06-2006 3:54 PM CK has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 35 of 60 (318513)
06-06-2006 11:46 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by riVeRraT
06-06-2006 11:15 PM


I can talk around the world on the same wttage produced by a cell phone. Antenna design and gain are paramount. Direction is everything.
fair enough.
Ever see an old TV antenna with a directional motor drive on it?
Ever see those microwave antennas that look like horns on top of towers? They only go in one direction, and reject signals from all other directions. SAtelite dishes, arecibo, etc. you get the picture.
well, cellphone antennas are actually kind of special. they are a fractal pattern, called a serpinski carpet, that maximizes length for area. i'm not totally sure an antenna of this design is especially affected by direction. but i don't know.
I love that show, we watch it all the time. I saw that one.
mythbusters is the greatest show on television. science, skepticism, crazy engineering, and a really cute intern. i have a major tv-land crush on kari byron...


This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by riVeRraT, posted 06-06-2006 11:15 PM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by riVeRraT, posted 06-07-2006 8:06 AM arachnophilia has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 36 of 60 (318518)
06-06-2006 11:53 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by tsig
06-06-2006 9:55 PM


Re: ability
you might to study some strucual engineering before you say how it happened.
I didn't say what happened, if you'll actually read my post. And I was fairly clear, I thought, when I said that I wasn't an engineer, and so I didn't have the expertise to evaluate the evidence.
I don't think the WTC was leveled by explosives. I think it was leveled by terrorists on airplanes - with the full foreknowledge of top government officials. Somebody, after all, called San Francisco mayor Willie Brown and told him not to fly on that day, eight hours before the first plane hit. Somebody applied the pressure that meant that warning after warning about the attacks was ignored and dismissed. Somebody made $5 million dollars betting against United and American airlines on September 10th.
Somebody scheduled four seperate wargames on the very same day, including one that simulated airplanes crashing into an NRO office. Somebody decided not to scramble interceptors for the subsequent hijacked airplanes. Somebody - Bush - made it absolutely clear that, given a tragedy to rally America around, he'd spend that capital on an invasion of Iraq. In the subsequent days Cheney told intelligence staff to search for any possible connection between Iraq and 9/11, even implying they should fabricate some.
Those are the facts that I'm aware of, and an explanation that our government was unprepared and incompetent seems to me to be the explanation that multiplies complexites - they say that "9/11 changed everything", well, apparently it changed government officials who were such idiots that they couldn't see it coming into geniuses who were able to take advantage of the tragedy in almost every concievable way.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by tsig, posted 06-06-2006 9:55 PM tsig has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by tsig, posted 06-07-2006 9:21 PM crashfrog has replied
 Message 48 by Buzsaw, posted 06-08-2006 10:18 PM crashfrog has replied

  
riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 416 days)
Posts: 5788
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 37 of 60 (318630)
06-07-2006 8:06 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by arachnophilia
06-06-2006 11:46 PM


well, cellphone antennas are actually kind of special. they are a fractal pattern, called a serpinski carpet, that maximizes length for area. i'm not totally sure an antenna of this design is especially affected by direction. but i don't know.
The antennas on the phones themselves are omni directional, because the user does not know which direction the tower is in.
But if you look on the towers, you'll see long, almost flat plates that are very directional. There will be several pointing in different directions. These are high gain directional antennas.
Then there is amplifiers on the receive end, and on the transmit end. The effceincy of the design can bring your cell coverage up by several factors. Otherwise if 2 cell phones tried to talk to each other, the range would be very limited.
That is an image of a radiation pattern emitted by a cell phone type antenna. From this web-page:
Redirecting to https://privateline.com
You see very little goes up or down. It relies on reflection for that, which is losing gain.
Directional antenna - Wikipedia

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by arachnophilia, posted 06-06-2006 11:46 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by arachnophilia, posted 06-07-2006 3:47 PM riVeRraT has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 38 of 60 (318802)
06-07-2006 3:47 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by riVeRraT
06-07-2006 8:06 AM


snazzy. interesting information, thanks.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by riVeRraT, posted 06-07-2006 8:06 AM riVeRraT has not replied

  
tsig
Member (Idle past 2909 days)
Posts: 738
From: USA
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 39 of 60 (318917)
06-07-2006 9:21 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by crashfrog
06-06-2006 11:53 PM


Re: "The Day"
I didn't say what happened, if you'll actually read my post. And I was fairly clear, I thought, when I said that I wasn't an engineer, and so I didn't have the expertise to evaluate the evidence.
I don't think the WTC was leveled by explosives. I think it was leveled by terrorists on airplanes - with the full foreknowledge of top government officials. Somebody, after all, called San Francisco mayor Willie Brown and told him not to fly on that day, eight hours before the first plane hit. Somebody applied the pressure that meant that warning after warning about the attacks was ignored and dismissed. Somebody made $5 million dollars betting against United and American airlines on September 10th.
Somebody scheduled four seperate wargames on the very same day, including one that simulated airplanes crashing into an NRO office. Somebody decided not to scramble interceptors for the subsequent hijacked airplanes. Somebody - Bush - made it absolutely clear that, given a tragedy to rally America around, he'd spend that capital on an invasion of Iraq. In the subsequent days Cheney told intelligence staff to search for any possible connection between Iraq and 9/11, even implying they should fabricate some.
Those are the facts that I'm aware of, and an explanation that our government was unprepared and incompetent seems to me to be the explanation that multiplies complexites - they say that "9/11 changed everything", well, apparently it changed government officials who were such idiots that they couldn't see it coming into geniuses who were able to take advantage of the tragedy in almost every concievable way.
Understand
Who was the Somebody who called the mayor and scheduled the wargames? If we coud find them Somebody's we could unravel the plan.
Crash I have never voted for a Bush in my life and I know the War in Iraq was done on false premises, but it Was The WMD that Bush lied about.
In 911 he did just did what any politician would do and used events to further his agenda.
In any given day many things will happen, it is only when a day becomes "The Day" that it is subjected to the microscrutiny of the CT'ers and random events can be related to each other.
Try it. Pick a day and then make up a CT and see if you cannot find some events in your daily newspaper that support your conspiricy theory.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by crashfrog, posted 06-06-2006 11:53 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by crashfrog, posted 06-07-2006 9:46 PM tsig has replied

  
tsig
Member (Idle past 2909 days)
Posts: 738
From: USA
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 40 of 60 (318918)
06-07-2006 9:29 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by arachnophilia
06-06-2006 10:46 PM


Re:chains
just yankin' your chain a little, no offense meant. but we do get the occasion person here that does claim to be someone he's not.
You mean some people would lie????
I am shocked that such behavior would be tolerated on any site.
If Percy would get the free truth-detecting software then we would not have this problem.
Sometimes this site is So 21st century.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by arachnophilia, posted 06-06-2006 10:46 PM arachnophilia has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 41 of 60 (318920)
06-07-2006 9:46 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by tsig
06-07-2006 9:21 PM


Re: "The Day"
Conspiracies happen, TS. I mean, even the official report was that 9/11 was committed by a conspiracy - an Al Queda conspiracy. And if you don't believe that our own government can enact a conspiracy that results in the death of hundreds or thousands, read about the Tuskeegee experiment - or even the Iraq war itself.
In 911 he did just did what any politician would do and used events to further his agenda.
Sure. My position is that he knew he would be able to do that in advance, and rather than take active steps to prevent a tragedy, both ignored the evidence presented and interfered, when possible, with those prepared to investigate further.
Otherwise we're looking at an improbable convergence of incompetence; an incompetence that suddenly evaporated afterwards when it came time to exploit a nation's tragedy.
In any given day many things will happen, it is only when a day becomes "The Day" that it is subjected to the microscrutiny of the CT'ers and random events can be related to each other.
At what point, though, are there so many "apparent" coincidences that an explanation of random occurance is much less likely than conspiracy?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by tsig, posted 06-07-2006 9:21 PM tsig has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by tsig, posted 06-08-2006 12:01 PM crashfrog has replied

  
tsig
Member (Idle past 2909 days)
Posts: 738
From: USA
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 42 of 60 (319072)
06-08-2006 12:01 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by crashfrog
06-07-2006 9:46 PM


Re: bye and thanks for all the posts
At what point, though, are there so many "apparent" coincidences that an explanation of random occurance is much less likely than conspiracy?
It's your question I'll let you do the math.
Crash I see that you are a true believer so I refuse to go down this rabbit hole any further.
Thanks for the posts.
You might want to read the threads Loose Change I and Loose Change II at the JREF forum. All 1,350 entries.
Edited by ts, : remove snark

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by crashfrog, posted 06-07-2006 9:46 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by crashfrog, posted 06-08-2006 12:53 PM tsig has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 43 of 60 (319083)
06-08-2006 12:53 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by tsig
06-08-2006 12:01 PM


Re: bye and thanks for all the posts
Crash I see that you are a true believer so I refuse to go down this rabbit hole any further.
Don't write me off like a crank. I've taken the trouble to read your arguments, understand them, and respond appropriately. Is it such an enormous thing for you to afford me the same courtesy?
I'm no "true believer". I've laid out the verified facts that don't fit the official story, under any circumstances. You can either try to rebut that reasoning, or not. But if you can't, don't try to pretend that your failiure is the result of my refusal to examine evidence with an open mind. The fact that you haven't even come close to offering anything convincing doesn't indicate some unbreachable wall of suspicion I've erected - 9/11 happened while I was a Bush-supporting Republican, after all. What it indicates is that your arguments are so impotent and poorly-sourced that you're too embarassed to even half-heartedly defend them.
Run off with your tail between your legs, if you like. But at least return some of the respect I've shown you, and don't try to insultingly wave the victory flag while you do so.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by tsig, posted 06-08-2006 12:01 PM tsig has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by tsig, posted 06-08-2006 7:59 PM crashfrog has replied

  
tsig
Member (Idle past 2909 days)
Posts: 738
From: USA
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 44 of 60 (319263)
06-08-2006 7:59 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by crashfrog
06-08-2006 12:53 PM


Re: bye and thanks for all the posts redux
I'm no "true believer". I've laid out the verified facts that don't fit the official story, under any circumstances. You can either try to rebut that reasoning, or not. But if you can't, don't try to pretend that your failiure is the result of my refusal to examine evidence with an open mind. The fact that you haven't even come close to offering anything convincing doesn't indicate some unbreachable wall of suspicion I've erected - 9/11 happened while I was a Bush-supporting Republican, after all. What it indicates is that your arguments are so impotent and poorly-sourced that you're too embarassed to even half-heartedly defend them.
Run off with your tail between your legs, if you like. But at least return some of the respect I've shown you, and don't try to insultingly wave the victory flag while you do so.
You presented no facts. Because two things happen on the same day does not mean they are connected.
Crash you are claming to read the minds and motives of people based on time-proximate events.
I used the tb term because I see that type of behavior. Your last post where you refer to me as "running away with my tail between my legs" is hardly the respect you called for earlier, calling for respect and not giving it, well, you may recall your experiences on this board.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by crashfrog, posted 06-08-2006 12:53 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by crashfrog, posted 06-08-2006 9:27 PM tsig has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 45 of 60 (319304)
06-08-2006 9:27 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by tsig
06-08-2006 7:59 PM


Re: bye and thanks for all the posts redux
Crash you are claming to read the minds and motives of people based on time-proximate events.
Oh, right. I mean, how unreasonable of me. Presumably, when you encounter a woman standing over a dead man with two holes in his chest, a smoking gun in one of her hands and pictures of the dead man and his mistress in the other, you don't know what to think, right? Surely the facts that he's been shot and she's holding the smoking gun are just coincidences, right? I mean, god forbid you come to the conclusion that you've just stumbled on a murder motivated by jealousy, because that would be "reading the minds and motives of people based on time-proximate events", right?
Of course that's what I'm doing. That's how we know what people's minds and motives are - by what they do and when they do it. How else would we arrive at the truth about what people do?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by tsig, posted 06-08-2006 7:59 PM tsig has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by tsig, posted 06-08-2006 9:43 PM crashfrog has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024